Subject: Discussion related to cado-nfs
List archive
- From: Zimmermann Paul <Paul.Zimmermann@inria.fr>
- To: paul.leyland@gmail.com
- Cc: Cado-nfs-discuss@lists.gforge.inria.fr
- Subject: Re: [Cado-nfs-discuss] Curious non-monotonicity
- Date: Mon, 25 Nov 2013 16:38:28 +0100
- List-archive: <http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/pipermail/cado-nfs-discuss>
- List-id: A discussion list for Cado-NFS <cado-nfs-discuss.lists.gforge.inria.fr>
Paul,
> From: Paul Leyland <paul.leyland@gmail.com>
> Date: Mon, 25 Nov 2013 15:27:39 +0000
>
> Running "grep tasks.sieve.rels_wanted pa*" in params_py yields curious
> output. Spotted this because I've started a c130 immediately after a
> successful c131. The relevant lines from that grep are:
>
> params.c130:tasks.sieve.rels_wanted = 29000000
> params.c131:tasks.sieve.rels_wanted = 20000000
>
>
> FWIW, the c131 needed a little over 24M relations.
>
> I'm guessing that, for instance,
>
> params.c132:tasks.sieve.rels_wanted = 1
>
> indicates that no experimental data is yet available. As time goes by I
> may be able to provide such data.
>
>
> Paul
you might use rels_wanted=1 always, then after each unsuccessful filtering
CADO-NFS will try with 10% more relations.
Paul Z.
- [Cado-nfs-discuss] Curious non-monotonicity, Paul Leyland, 11/25/2013
- Re: [Cado-nfs-discuss] Curious non-monotonicity, Alexander Kruppa, 11/25/2013
- Re: [Cado-nfs-discuss] Curious non-monotonicity, Zimmermann Paul, 11/25/2013
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.19+.